Mary Novak – Just Court ADRhttp://blog.aboutrsi.org
The blog of Resolution Systems InstituteTue, 30 Jan 2018 17:09:37 +0000en-UShourly1Boston Police Department Creating Mediation Program for Complaints Against Policehttp://blog.aboutrsi.org/2015/program-design/boston-police-department-creating-mediation-program-for-complaints-against-police/
http://blog.aboutrsi.org/2015/program-design/boston-police-department-creating-mediation-program-for-complaints-against-police/#respondThu, 14 May 2015 18:05:30 +0000http://blog.aboutrsi.org/?p=1518The Boston Police Department is in the last stages of creating a program to address citizen complaints against police officers. The program would attempt to resolve disputes through mediation. Organizers hope to improve police/citizen relations, and to help clear some of the backlog of citizen complaints in Boston that may take 400 days or more to resolve.

The program is anticipated to involve the police department, three police unions and the Harvard Mediation Program at Harvard Law School. At this time, the unions still need to approve the program policy. Mediators would include Harvard Law School students and local residents trained in dispute resolution. They would handle moderate disputes from the Boston PD Internal Affairs department, such as “rudeness, unprofessional conduct and abusive language.”

Mediations would take place on neutral territory away from the police department. Most cases would conclude in a day, and the Harvard Mediation Program would supply mediators at no charge. Internal Affairs would continue to manage more serious complaints.

]]>http://blog.aboutrsi.org/2015/program-design/boston-police-department-creating-mediation-program-for-complaints-against-police/feed/0Domestic Violence Finding Overrides Agreement to Mediate, NJ Court Sayshttp://blog.aboutrsi.org/2015/court-opinions/domestic-violence-finding-overrides-agreement-to-mediate-nj-court-says/
http://blog.aboutrsi.org/2015/court-opinions/domestic-violence-finding-overrides-agreement-to-mediate-nj-court-says/#respondWed, 15 Apr 2015 16:21:09 +0000http://blog.aboutrsi.org/?p=1506A case in the Appellate Division of New Jersey Superior Court stands as a reminder of the complexities of family mediation when domestic violence is involved. Indeed, the court found that a finding of domestic violence can trump a requirement to mediate. The parties, O.P. and L.G-P. (names kept confidential by the court) were a divorced couple with one child. In their property settlement agreement they had agreed to continue communicating about their child, and to use mediation in case of disagreement. However, after the divorce judgment a final restraining order (FRO) was entered against the former husband O.P. under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act. After the FRO, support was ordered to be paid through the Probation Division.

L.G-P., the former wife, took O.P. to chancery court for several payments she said O.P. had not made. Some of the missed payments hinged on communications that L.G-P. had not had with O.P. She protested that the restraining order meant that O.P. was not to communicate with her. The court responded by encouraging her to change the FRO so that the two parties could email about these matters. L.G-P. said she did not want to do this because O.P. would send her derogatory and threatening emails.

L.G-P. also asked the court to release her from the mediation requirement, saying that past mediations had not led to her receiving any of the requested payments from O.P. When L.G-P. claimed that one matter had not yet been resolved during two years of mediation sessions, the trial court ordered her to go to a mediator and resolve the rest of their issues.

The appeals court reversed this order. The court declared that the provisions of a property settlement agreement that required mediation and communication should not be enforced after a final restraining order prohibiting contact was entered. The court stated that “[a]lthough returning to court may be inconvenient and costly, alternate dispute resolution methods are not safe when an FRO has been entered” because perpetrators of domestic violence tend to control and dominate their partners. Therefore, the court found, mediation could not be safe even if the environment were secure, or if shuttle mediation were used or if the parties had representation. Interestingly, New Jersey statutes already prohibit mediation in cases determining whether domestic violence has occurred or determining custody or parenting time. Here, the court ordered that mediation should not be used even when an existing agreement called for it, after the court issued a final finding of domestic violence through an FRO.

]]>http://blog.aboutrsi.org/2015/court-opinions/domestic-violence-finding-overrides-agreement-to-mediate-nj-court-says/feed/0Chicago-Area Settlement Weekhttp://blog.aboutrsi.org/2015/uncategorized/chicago-area-settlement-week/
http://blog.aboutrsi.org/2015/uncategorized/chicago-area-settlement-week/#respondMon, 16 Mar 2015 15:53:22 +0000http://blog.aboutrsi.org/?p=1489The Illinois Chapter of the Association of Attorney-Mediators (AAM) is sponsoring a Settlement Week from June 1-5, 2015. Illinois mediators will mediate civil cases throughout the Chicagoland area at no cost to the parties.

Attorneys who have cases they would like to bring to Settlement Week can jointly select from a list of participating mediators. Mediators will include members of the Illinois Chapter of the Association of Attorney-Mediators and other mediators certified by the Circuit Court of Cook County or another Illinois Circuit Court.

The mediations will take place during the five-day Settlement Week and are expected to take a full or half day. The focus of the program is on cases in the civil calendars in the Courts of Cook, DuPage, Lake, McHenry, and Will Counties.

]]>http://blog.aboutrsi.org/2015/uncategorized/chicago-area-settlement-week/feed/0Court ADR Trends for 2015http://blog.aboutrsi.org/2015/uncategorized/court-adr-trends-for-2015/
http://blog.aboutrsi.org/2015/uncategorized/court-adr-trends-for-2015/#commentsThu, 22 Jan 2015 22:16:30 +0000http://blog.aboutrsi.org/?p=1453As we enter a new year, we’ve decided to round up some of the most interesting trends we’ve observed in court ADR.

Court mediation used to respond to major economic crises and natural disasters

Last year perhaps the most visible trend in court ADR was the courts’ use of mediation to address truly large-scale crises. From the mediators who helped opposing groups reach the Grand Bargain that led Detroit out of bankruptcy, to the mediations being used to address thousands of insurance claims that remain from Hurricane Sandy, courts essentially created ad-hoc ADR programs to respond to major crises.

The joint session in jeopardy

A major topic of discussion this year was the increasing tendency for parties and their advocates to avoid the joint session in mediation. A wide-ranging discussion of how this trend affects the integrity of the mediation process and whether the shift can be turned back is sure to continue for some time to come.

Foreclosure Mediation reaches version 3.0

In a previous column about trends, we wrote about “Foreclosure 2.0.” We saw a trend then that continues into the present: with foreclosure mediation programs now in place around the country, many have turned from implementation to improvement. In Oregon, for example, the state legislature revamped its program to get more lenders to participate, and in Maine, the Attorney General led a process of evaluation and refinement.

Now that foreclosure mediation is maturing as a process, there is more opportunity for programs to connect and collaborate. With our own programs up and running, RSI is pleased to have assisted colleagues in Alabama and Massachusetts, who approached us to share information.

More research into what actually happens during mediation

The focus of mediation research is moving beyond studying outcomes and the effects of case characteristics and is now prying open the black box that is the mediation itself. From conversation analysis to observational studies of mediator behaviors, more researchers are trying to figure out what mediators actually do, and of what they do, what is most effective.

More use of parenting coordination and other processes tailored to specific needs

Parenting coordination has been around for a while, but recently we’ve heard more buzz about this process. PC and similar processes represent a shift away from using one single process, such as mediation, as a catchall. Instead, courts are tailoring alternatives for the parties who need them. Mediation works well for most family cases, but is less suited to high-conflict divorces. Rather than force those parties into a process that’s less likely to work, courts are turning to PC, a process that has proven beneficial in high-conflict cases.

Narrative Mediation and storytelling moving from academic theory into practice

We were surprised by the number and scope of Narrative-focused presentations at the ACR National Conference this year. While Narrative Mediation has been popular in academic circles for a while, an increasing number of practitioners such as Dr. Gerald Monk and Dr. Samantha Hardy are moving their work from theory into practice.

New forms of ADR respond to an aging population’s needs

We’ve recently seen both Elder Care Mediation and Eldercaring Coordination emerge as two relatively new processes to attract attention.

Establishing standards is becoming a basic part of creating a new process

We think the debut of the Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordination, just as this process is emerging, signifies a shift towards using guidelines to maintain quality, and a growing maturation of the field.

Thanks very much to Susan Yates, Jennifer Shack, Shawn Davis, Teresa Frisbie, Alyson Carrel and Daniel Gandert for their input.

]]>http://blog.aboutrsi.org/2015/uncategorized/court-adr-trends-for-2015/feed/1Big News in Court ADR — A Look Back at 2014http://blog.aboutrsi.org/2014/ethics/big-news-in-court-adr-a-look-back-at-2014/
http://blog.aboutrsi.org/2014/ethics/big-news-in-court-adr-a-look-back-at-2014/#commentsThu, 18 Dec 2014 20:38:56 +0000http://blog.aboutrsi.org/?p=1436Our monthly e-newsletter Court ADR Connectionhas updates on RSI’s activities, cutting-edge ADR research, and the latest court ADR news from across the country. As we wind down 2014, I thought it might be fun to take a look at a few of the most significant news stories we reported on this year.

Detroit Bankruptcy Mediated in “Grand Bargain”

The most-watched court ADR news story of 2014 may have been the mediated settlement that resolved the City of Detroit’s municipal bankruptcy. Without doubt, this riveting drama of competing interests coming together to form a “Grand Bargain” will be studied and discussed for years to come. We reported on facets of this story a few times, both here in our blog and in our newsletter:

Two unions have agreed to participate in the “grand bargain” being negotiated in Detroit’s bankruptcy mediation, led by US District Judge Gerald Rosen. The Michigan Building and Construction Council will make “material contributions” to health care costs for Detroit’s retirees. Though not contributing money directly, the United Auto Workers agreed to help raise contributions toward the health care costs. Before these pledges, the Bankruptcy Court had secured 660 million dollars in contributions toward bankruptcy relief, much of it from donations by nonprofit organizations gathered through the mediation process. Governor Rick Snyder has called for the state to contribute a 200 million dollar lump sum towards the grand bargain, which is designed to aid Detroit pensions and the Detroit Institute of Arts. However, some legislators had expressed reluctance unless the city’s unions also participated. The Michigan Building and Construction Council and the UAW are the only two unions to participate so far. The mediators ‘ statement about their agreement expresses hope that other labor organizations will participate, but notes that the trade unions’ participation is “contingent upon full funding of the grand bargain by the foundations, the state and the Detroit Institute of Arts.”

Bellwether Mediation Tests the Waters in Medical Class-Action

Our readers showed a lot of interest in our report on the billion-dollar settlement between a medical manufacturer and patients who received a faulty hip implant. The story was intriguing because of the size of the settlement and for the first use that I have seen of the novel process “bellwether mediation.”

Billion-Dollar Settlement Following “Bellwether” Mediation over Hip Implants, December 2014

The manufacturers of the Stryker Hip implant have settled for up to $1.7 billion with thousands of patients who received metal-on-metal hip implants with fundamental design flaws. The implants, whose debris could cause metal poisoning or extreme pain, required many elderly patients to receive corrective surgery at high medical risk. In the New Jersey Superior Court of Bergen County, at Judge Brian Martinotti’s recommendation, 21 of the first 25 parties who filed suit participated in a “bellwether mediation process.” [Search for this phrase to read the linked article without paywall.] The bellwether mediation was held early in the litigation process with the goal of demonstrating whether mediation would succeed at ending lawsuits or whether it would be better to continue the litigation. The judge appointed three retired state and federal judges as well as a mediation group to mediate the first cases. This allowed company representatives to hear stories directly from patients. The mediation lasted four months, moving quickly in recognition that time was of the essence for the injured parties. Patients whose failed implants required surgery before the settlement were awarded at least $300,000 per hip, with those with the worst complications receiving up to $1.7 million. Patients whose implants fail after this agreement are likely to file additional lawsuits.

New ADR Programs in Ohio

Early in the year, the Ohio Supreme Court amended its rules to allow courts to order parenting coordination. Our readers were interested to see the new rules for this process. The state also created an ADR program specifically for public officials.

Ohio courts that use parenting coordination will follow amended rules effective April 1. [See Rules 90-90.12] The rules will allow courts to order parenting coordination, a child-focused ADR process, in which parenting coordinators help families implement parental rights and responsibilities. The amended rules describe the role and responsibilities of the parenting coordinators, and of the local courts that use them. While local Ohio courts are already using parenting coordination, the Ohio Supreme Court’s goal in establishing statewide use was to ensure that coordinators are qualified and to promote quality and consistency in court programs across Ohio.

Ohio Supreme Court Creating ADR Program for Public Officials, January 2014

The Ohio Supreme Court’s Dispute Resolution Section is surveying statewide government officials in order to create a new dispute resolution program. The program will offer a formal process to mediate disputes between public officials. The Ohio Supreme Court assumed these duties in 2011, after the Commission on Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management was abolished by the general assembly.

If you’d like to keep up with our news reporting at RSI, you can subscribe to the Court ADR Connection. Of course, you can also receive notices when our Just Court ADR blog is updated by following the “subscribe” link at the top of this page.